Tuesday, May 08, 2012

Breivik's
obsession with Islamization is (I hope) but a tiny footnote to the history of
the coming civil war between MRAs and manginas over feminist sex law. The lack
of attention to men's rights issues in the trial so far is somewhat
disappointing. Breivik at his worst has even embraced and amplified pieces of feminist
dogma, most notably when he claims Muslim men have raped 90,000 Norwegian women since
1960. This is doubtless true if you use the feminist (and now legal) definition
of rape, but if rape instead is reasonably defined as intercourse resisted by
the woman to the best of her ability unless she is credibly threatened with death
or serious injury, the claim becomes untenable. Nonetheless, some auspicious
developments for men have emerged from the trial so far. Breivik is at his best
when he takes on psychiatry. The spectacle of court-appointed psychiatrists
exposing themselves as charlatans is pleasing to behold. Indeed the most positive
upshot of Breivik's activism and judicial process, in my view, is making it more
difficult to declare future activists insane. Breivik has thus served to
habilitate Western terrorism. Since "treatment" in a mental asylum is
the most barbaric and inhumane sanction society can legally impose on an
individual (arguably worse than the death penalty), such punishment is understandably
wished upon perpetrators of extraordinarily heinous crimes. However, psychiatry
is inherently pseudoscientific and coercive enough without being brazenly applied towards
political ends. Thus when activists are defined as "psychotic" and
"schizophrenic" and held unaccountable merely because their political
views deviate from whatever is politically correct, the charade becomes so
obvious that it backfires on their entire profession and the psychiatrists are
so widely discredited that their efforts work to the terrorist's advantage. If
Breivik is subjected to chemical torture, it will be obvious that the system is
corrupt and does not follow its own ostensible ethics which require a valid diagnosis. Pretending he is insane
when he is obviously a rational warrior would turn him into a martyr and
bolster any resistance movement against the current regime. It is possible to
disagree with a political regime and decide to fight it even unto death without
being delusional. You may not agree with the ideals behind that decision, but
defining such activists as insane only serves to obliterate your own
credibility and hence undermine the legitimacy of the regime you represent. This realization has evidently hit the Norwegian forensic psychiatric community like a ton of bricks and they are now engaged in damage control, trying to save face by having Breivik declared competent after all, which is the maximum victory he can gain from the trial under the circumstances and what now appears to be the most likely outcome.

Unlike
Breivik, I don't mind living in a multicultural society. Freedom of religion
and migration are self-evident rights to a libertarian like me, and racism is
anathema. But I do not want to live in a society with sex laws based on
misandry. The feminist police state is so morally repugnant that I cannot in good
conscience stand by complacently as it escalates, even if I am not directly
punished by feminist law myself. An activist for men is still such a rara avis that
we must at least to some extent laud any adversary of the feminist state, even
if he is unsavory in some ways. MRAs are few because sadly, most people lack
the moral development to see beyond positive law. They fail to comprehend the concept
of natural law, which would tell them feminist sex law is a travesty upon earth.
The problem with most people is they are too law-abiding. Hence they are easy
to oppress, and easily persuaded to hurt others in the name of authority. Most
people just blindly follow authority. I differ from the hoi polloi most
significantly insofar as I realize the authorities are full of shit,
particularly in regard to sex crimes, and so I do not respect them. I fully
discern what hateful scumbags are the feminists in the abuse industry who came
up with our contemporary sex laws, and I understand the nature of the lies they
use to justify them all too well to fall for their propaganda.

Excessive
respect for authorities is even found in the Men's Movement. Hence you have the
syndrome among the more simpleminded MRAs that the only antidote to untrammeled
criminalization of male sexuality they can see is to apply these same absurd
laws to women equally. They regard it as a victory when hateful laws are
applied to women as well as men, partly because they are brainwashed by
feminists to believe the sexes are equal and also because they cannot conceive
of nullifying laws because their moral development appears to be lacking. They think the law is the highest authority. Thus
they tend to applaud when the feminist state hurts women too, for example by
imprisoning a mother for three years and requiring her to register as a sex offender because her 17-year-old daughter decided to work as a stripper. Yes, the feminist state has once again outdone itself in hateful absurdity. At this point we can dispense
with any notion that the state exists to protect women and see it for the behemoth
inflictor of maximal damage to all people that it really is. But two wrongs do
not make a right. We need to cut the crap and attack the madness of feminist anti-sex
hatred at its core.

I base my
morality on basic universal (libertarian) principles, and I disrespect positive
law when it egregiously contravenes what I believe is right. This means I
reject at least 95% of current sexual legislation, which I see for the misandry
it is. Bluntly put, I consider myself a political sex offender, which is not a
popular position to take, but to me it is more important to do the right thing
than to be tolerated by polite society.

What are
the limits to misandry? Experience tells me there is literally no limit. Misandry
can proceed arbitrarily far. To illustrate, age of consent and statutory rape
laws are openly based on nothing but legal fictions with no basis in fact
whatsoever, yet they enjoy wide support. The very word "statutory" candidly
signifies that these crimes are created by statute rather than reality. Yet droves
of "men" (and I use that term loosely) are primitive enough to internalize the hatred against themselves codified
by these laws. They are simpletons and impressionable fools, to be sure, but
that is how it is. Moreover, an entire industry (that we MRAs contemptuously call
the abuse industry) has sprung up to reify the legal fictions represented by these laws, brainwashing girls and, perversely,
even sometimes boys so as to feel "raped" or "abused" after
harmless, consensual sex. Every time I read about men (and sometimes women)
falling victim to these laws -- which is daily -- my hatred against feminism
grows.

No matter
how far the feminist state escalates, the majority of men will support it. Politics
is simply a competition of who can be the biggest mangina and hurt men the most
to the advantage of women, and the cops will enforce any law you tell them to
no matter how unreasonable and hateful. History has shown that if you (or even
an invading army) tell Norwegian cops to round up all the Jews and ship them
off to death camps after confiscating all their property, for example, they
will happily oblige. There is no reason they won't do the same with sex
offenders, and feminists get to define "sex offender" exactly they way they
want. The only people who deserve to be targeted by feminist sex laws are the politicians
themselves. Amusingly, male politicians are frequently hoist by the hateful
laws they helped pass, but even then they will never speak up against the law
itself. They will merely defend themselves within the framework of the law (claiming
they "didn't do it") rather than seek jury nullification like a proper MRA would do, and they will continue to support any
misandrist law the feminists can conceive of, at least as long as women can
vote. Women are Team Women and so are most men. If the feminist state tomorrow
declared, say, that sex with women with brown eyes is always rape, I have no
doubt manginas would support this law and the entire justice system would
unflinchingly enforce it, because many laws already on the books are every bit
as absurd. As we keep seeing time and again, the cops are unabashed scum of the
earth who blatantly single out the most misandristic laws for the highest
priority of enforcement. I have followed feminist escalation long enough to be
disillusioned of any limits to misandry, because clearly none exist.

However, as
the feminist police state escalates, even as most men support it or are complacent,
the few MRAs who do oppose it will
get more militant. The current political milieu is tremendously radicalizing
for those of us who pay attention. Opposition must rise from the grassroots in
order to perturb such a regime. With asymmetric warfare, we can inflict
significant damage and perhaps influence policies and laws. There is precedent for
activism at the group level influencing authorities. Look to the
African-Americans for one example. Los Angeles burned in 1992 because blacks
were angry about a court verdict, triggering a new verdict with a fairer
outcome (not that I condone double jeopardy, but the point is blacks are admirably capable of group activism, unlike men). Now Zimmerman must be lynched in order to avoid race riots, because
blacks are race-conscious. Unfortunately, men are still low on
gender-consciousness, so the feminist state can pretty much do as it pleases
for now. Men ought to emulate the black sense of racial identity applied to gender, and we need
more belligerent leaders to incite the masses like they have MLK, Jesse Jackson
and so on. My dream is for the Men's Rights Movement to grow strong enough to at
least hurt the state at a comparable level to what American blacks can,
eventually making the authorities too scared to fight their war on male
sexuality. If we trudge on, we can achieve this. Let us set aside racial and
religious differences and each of us from the humblest blogger to the deadliest
activist do what we can to fight feminism. Let us all get along and direct all our
animosity squarely at the feminist state and its enforcers.